Jump to content
Washington DC Message Boards

Carbon Trade

Recommended Posts

CARBON TRADE seems to be new bussiness dimmension that is given priority and is potrayed by the industry towards their commitment to the cause of environment.


But many things have to be included along with the polluting industry. The people who are responsible for emissons by means of availing luxury causing disproportionate emissions are the ones should be made to comply an "individual standard".


There is also a large question that remains how good is money is going to be utilised so as to cause some "anti- warming" of the globe or "pro-cooling" of the globe.


Since huge money is invloved so also will be the bigots competing with the geniune people who has real concern for the environment.


Reversing the warming trend is no doubt a huge task. Much more complicated is to authenticate this reversal trend if so some steps are taken to reverse the warming. It could be confusing and verification of reversal of warming trend using the money got from Carbon Trade will be one of the important milestone demanded by the companies and the public who paid to contribute Carbon "Tax".


Moreover the reversing trend itself is not a simple "switchover" as an operation analogous to hitting keys in a PC to get the task done. It is a time consuming and intensely testing the patience and perseverance of our generations and not us. So the Commitment and contributions could yield only after a long time. It is surely going to be a testing time ahead for the "in coming generation".


Link to comment
Share on other sites


Cute name. What does it mean in English? I think our government needs withdraw its annual $25 billion in subsidies for coal and oil and create equivalent subsidies for clean, safe, non-nuclear energy alternatives. I really get upset seeing polar bears drowning and people having to leave their island homes.


Tell me what you think about this White House release.


Today, President Bush Directed The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) And The U.S. Departments Of Energy (DOE), Transportation (DOT), And Agriculture (USDA) To Take The First Steps Toward Regulations Using The "Twenty In Ten" Plan As A Starting Point. The President has directed these agencies to take the first steps toward regulations that would cut gasoline consumption and greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles, using as a starting point his "Twenty in Ten" plan to reduce U.S. gasoline consumption by 20 percent over the next 10 years.


In The State Of The Union Address, The President Announced His "Twenty In Ten" Goal To Cut U.S. Gasoline Consumption By 20 Percent Over The Next Ten Years. By increasing the supply of alternative fuels and making motor vehicles more energy efficient, the President's "Twenty in Ten" plan provides a framework to address energy security and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles and off-road engines and equipment.


The Administration Has Sent Congress Legislative Proposals To Achieve "Twenty In Ten" With Two Steps:


Increasing The Supply Of Renewable And Other Alternative Fuels By Setting A Mandatory Fuels Standard To Require The Equivalent Of 35 Billion Gallons Of Renewable And Other Alternative Fuels In 2017 – Nearly Five Times The 2012 Target Now In Law. In 2017, this will displace 15 percent of projected annual gasoline use.

Reforming And Modernizing Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards For Cars And Extending The Current Light Truck Rule. In 2017, this will reduce projected annual gasoline use by up to 8.5 billion gallons, a further 5 percent reduction that, in combination with increasing the supply of renewable and other alternative fuels, will bring the total reduction in projected annual gasoline use to 20 percent.

On April 2, 2007, The Supreme Court Ruled That The EPA Must Take Action Under The Clean Air Act Regarding Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Motor Vehicles.


In Response To The Supreme Court's Ruling, The President Directed Cabinet Agencies To Take The First Steps Toward Regulations Based On "Twenty In Ten" That Will Make Our Economy Stronger, Our Environment Cleaner, And Our Nation More Secure For Generations To Come.

The President Has Directed Members Of His Administration To Complete This Process By The End Of 2008. The President has asked Administration officials to listen to public input; carefully consider safety, science, and available technology; and evaluate benefits and costs before they reach any decisions. This is a complicated legal and technical matter that will take time to fully resolve. Yet it is important to move forward.


The President Also Signed An Executive Order Requiring Coordination Among Federal Agencies Tasked With The Development Of Any Regulations Affecting Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Motor Vehicles. The Executive Order will ensure coordinated agency efforts on regulatory actions aimed at protecting the environment with respect to greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles, nonroad vehicles, and nonroad engines proceed in a manner consistent with sound science, analysis of benefits and costs, public safety, and economic growth.


The Steps The President Announced Today Are Not A Substitute For Effective Legislation. The Administration will redouble its efforts to work with Congress on a bipartisan "Twenty in Ten" bill.


Today's Actions Build On The President's Continued Commitment To Our Energy Security And Our Environment


Since The President Took Office, The Federal Government Has Invested $12 Billion To Develop Cleaner, Cheaper, And More Reliable Energy Sources. We have now reached a pivotal moment where advances in technology are creating new ways to improve energy security, strengthen national security, and protect the environment. The President's "Twenty in Ten" goal will help achieve all these priorities.


The President Has Devoted $37 Billion To Climate Change-Related Activities Since 2001. The President has requested an additional $7.4 billion for FY 2008 – $205 million more than this year. This amount would support a wide range of climate change-related research, development, and deployment programs, voluntary partnerships, and international aid efforts.


The President Has Twice Increased Fuel Economy Standards For Light Trucks, Covering Model Years From 2005 Through 2011. The two actions cumulatively raised light truck fuel economy standards from 20.7 mpg prior to 2005, to 24 mpg in 2011. These actions are expected to save 14 billion gallons of fuel over the life of the affected vehicles, and reduce net greenhouse gas emissions by 107 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent.


We Are Well On Track To Meet – And Currently Projected To Exceed – The President's 2002 Goal Of Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emission Intensity 18 Percent By 2012. U.S. greenhouse gas intensity declined by 2.5 percent in 2005, much faster than the average decline of 1.9 percent over the 1990-2005 period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Cute name. What does it mean in English? I think our government needs withdraw its annual $25 billion in subsidies for coal and oil and create equivalent subsidies for clean, safe, non-nuclear energy alternatives. I really get upset seeing polar bears drowning and people having to leave their island homes.


Tell me what you think about this White House release.



Dear Natalia 1974,

You asked the meaning of my name “Nachiappan”--- It is a name in Tamil that originated few thousand years ago. Meaning— It is a divine representation or ability of Lord Shiva, to attend both as mother and father together as to save a pious and implicitly faithful soul in trouble or distress.

Shortly the story behind is when a pregnant girl at distress to reach a destination across a flooded river (in those days no bridges or vehicles or hospitals as like we have) happens to get labor pain when intending to cross the R.Cavery in Tamilnadu, no one to attend to her pain and about to deliver and her soul so pure earns the attention of Lord Shiva (who is a male God) comes to her help posing as a female nurse and attends to the labor and makes the delivery safe only to leave the scene quietly as the earthly mother of the girl comes to take charge."Nachi" the holy mother or respectful lady, "appan"--holy father who also came as

mother.(lord Shiva).

Coming to the subsides-- you are saying that you are"thinking" of removing subsidies for fossil fuels. Rather it should be that the US Govt (not only US all the other countries as well) should remove subsides in a very quick but in a phased manner within a year.

You asked me what I think about the quote above you sent---To be short and sharp--I think we would have been the wisest people if we had taken this "step" through out the world at least at the beginning of 1990. Since this only being said of taking a shape in the near future I can surely say we are not wise and proactive enough to preceive the consequences no matter how sophisticated and advanced we are,in the field of scientific acheivement and social intelligence. Eating ones own"Ecological Niche" is an utter foolishness which no species on earth has ever had done except humans. We say animals are not intelligent, may be they are not sophisticated as like we are but they surely will not be damn fools enough to damage their own "Niche".


It is the Great Homo sapiens ruthless to the core tore the planet. The cushion offered by the oceans to absorb Co2 is destroyed and now it has lost all its ability to function as Carbon sink more over becoming acidic enough to harm the ocean dewellers--Courtesy HomoSapians.


Now according to the quote it says that US is having a target named "20 in 10". What is the use trying to cure after ALLOWING to be severly infected? In Tamil we have a saying which goes "trying to catch a bird which is on flight leaving the one in hand". The polices in the quote reflect this anology.

Then the polices outlined are only pertaining to the US what will other giant emitter like China, India, Brazil,Russia and combined Europe going to do? After all this a " Global issue" not a "US concerned issue" or "a China concerned issue" or " an India concerned issue" or your issue or my issue & bussiness.This should reveal lack of coordination and concesus among the inhabitants of the planet--Shortly we are not wise and with very low social intelligence IQ.


The steps outlined in the quote are OK, but should have begun in 1990's which doing now implies acceptence and compliance but not willingly or whole heartedly, which could some what be "voluenteering under insistance or pressure and lacks edge to volunteer with zeal and determination to achieve".


Now these steps may or may not draw any significant response from the environment's functional mechanism.What I mean is reducing our emissions may be significant but can they yield SINGNIFICANT RESULTS by reversing the warming?by restoring the habitats destroyed?that is the most ultimate essentialty to live a normal life in this planet, will that be realised?That requires efforts from the whole of the world otherwise these curbs are of insignificant use enough to stand up against environmental disturbances.


Iam not trying to say that it is a mission impossible for an environmental restoration what Iam trying to say is--we could have done at ease if we had acted earlier than enormously burdening, risking ourselves mindlessly and damaging some marvelous wonders and gifts offered to us by nature branding those acts under the name "achievements" "developments". We lack the trait to develop friendly and harmonious coexistence with nature.


If one of our forefathers suddenly come alive and if we take a tour around the globe he might ask"Is there any alien invasion using any secret weapon system engineering a passive destruction?"!!!!!!


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...